Image: fcc.gov

As the holidays approach, prices are falling on flat-screen TVs like the ones that Gov. Pawlenty had removed from the civil-commitment facility for sex offenders at Moose Lake. Which suggests a dilemma: at what price point can the state ethically buy 50-inch TVs for sex offenders?

At $1,500 each, plus mounting costs, purchasing 50-inch plasma TVs for common areas where sex-crime ex-cons are confined indefinitely was a “bonehead decision,” T-Paw said at the time.

But now, you can get the same size TVs for $1,000. That’s a 33-percent drop, considerably better than the 400 percent hike in what it costs the state to run its Sex Offender Program since 2003, Pawlenty’s first year in office.

Every man has his price. What do salespeople have to do so that T-Paw leaves with a brand-new flat-screen TV for the sex offenders at Moose Lake?

“It’s like a roach motel,” says Phil Duran, an attorney with OutFront Minnesota, who has been an advocate for individuals committed to the program. “People check in, but they never check out.”

Gov. Tim Pawlenty and his Republican allies in the Legislature have repeatedly stated that spending on health and human services programs is out of control. He returned to the theme last week in announcing a proposal for an amendment to the state constitution to cap spending. “The health and human services budget is growing at rates that are just absolutely unsustainable,” Pawlenty stated.

But while politicians rail against the purported runaway costs of welfare spending and slash health insurance for some of the state’s poorest residents, the program with the most rapidly rising cost never merits mention.

Since 2003 the budget for the Minnesota Sex Offender Program (MSOP) has increased by almost 400 percent, mushrooming from $18.5 million annually to $71.6 million in just six years. The program is a budgetary black hole, but legislators don’t seem to care.

“It’s very difficult to get people to engage on it,” says Linda Berglin, who chairs the Health and Human Services Budget Division, and has sought changes to the MSOP for years. “Nobody wants to be associated with sex offenders. Nobody wants to be responsible for something that might cause a problem later on.”

But while the MSOP is largely ignored during budgetary debates, it recently garnered headlines because of the controversial purchase of two dozen flat-screen televisions for the facility in Moose Lake where the bulk of the patients reside. After the purchase details were outlined in the Star Tribune, Pawlenty immediately ordered that the televisions be removed. The plasma screens are now to be utilized by veterans’ homes and the Minnesota National Guard.

The televisions, however, are a fiscal red herring. Even at the extravagant cost of $2,282 to purchase and install each screen, they represent a rounding error in the overall cost of the sex offender program.

MSOP population mushroomed following Sjodin murder

The reason for the skyrocketing cost of the MSOP is simple: The number of sex offenders civilly committed to the program has surged dramatically in recent years. In 2003 there were 199 men (there are no women) being held at facilities in St. Peter and Moose Lake. But in the ensuing six years the population has nearly tripled, with 547 sex offenders currently being held for an indeterminate period of time. Each person enrolled in the program costs the state $134,000 annually.

The timing of this explosion in cost and sex offender commitments is by no means coincidental. In November 2003, Dru Sjodin, a 22-year-old college student, was murdered by a sex offender named Alfonso Rodriquez, Jr., who had been released from prison earlier that year after serving 23 years for stabbing and attempting to kidnap a woman. He also had a previous conviction for rape.

In the wake of that high-profile crime, the Minnesota Department of Corrections began referring all Level III sex offenders — those deemed most likely to commit additional crimes — due to be released for consideration of commitment. In addition, Pawlenty ordered that no civilly committed sex offenders be released unless required by law or ordered to do so by the courts. Under state law, the authority to provisionally release an offender who has met all the treatment requirements rests with a three-judge panel.

The ramifications of these changes were twofold: the pool of offenders being considered for civil commitment was dramatically expanded, and the odds of patients being released from the program were greatly reduced.

“Before Rodriguez the referrals that we were getting as examiners were really very, very dangerous sex offenders,” says Paul Reitman, a forensic psychologist who has screened candidates for civil commitment for roughly two decades. “Typically they had 10, 15, 20 victims.”

In some instances, individuals who have never committed violent offenses have gotten swept up in the program. The changes implemented to the program have also increased the number of people facing civil commitment who have only committed crimes as juveniles or suffer from developmental disabilities.

“We started getting a whole different group of people,” says Reitman.

So what exactly is Minnesota getting for its $70 million-a-year sex offender program? Duran, of OutFront Minnesota, doesn’t believe the MSOP has any credible means of treating patients. He points out that in response to the flat-screen television flap, the head of the program argued that the large-screen televisions were part of the treatment program.

“Then there are millions of Minnesotans every night who receive sex offender treatment,” Duran notes. “Who knew? If that’s the quality of decision making, then you know something’s wrong.”

Duran further points out that residents of the facilities are subjected to rules that even the most diligent patient would find exasperating to follow. For instance, he says, a ban on physical contact even extends to a prohibition on shaking hands.

“Shaking hands? That is a dangerous activity?” he wonders. “Help me understand in what context that makes sense.”

The systemic problems with the program are not a new development. But Berglin notes that primary oversight rests with the Minnesota Department of Human Services and that the Legislature’s authority is somewhat limited.

Last legislative session, for instance, Berglin sought what she thought was a fairly anodyne change. She introduced a bill that would have allowed felons facing potential civil commitment to voluntarily remain in prison until they had completed a sex-offender treatment program, thus potentially decreasing the chances that they’ll be subject to indefinite detainment.

“The Department of Corrections went bonkers,” she recalls. “They just went ballistic. I could not get that bill out of the judiciary committee because of the extreme position of the Department of Corrections.”

Little political will to reform program

Even when legislation has been pushed through it’s proven ineffective in breaking the patient logjam. Two years ago Berglin sponsored legislation changing the administrative process through which civilly committed sex offenders can be released. The sign-off previously had to come from the top official at the Minnesota Department of Human Services, a political appointee. Under the new legislation, the final call on whether a patient is released after completing treatment is made by a three-judge panel. But it made no difference in whether individuals were ultimately released.

Reitman and others stress that lower-cost alternatives exist that would be just as effective in protecting the public from people who have committed heinous crimes. In states such as Wisconsin, Washington and Texas, for instance, sex offenders have routinely been released from civil commitment programs and not committed additional crimes. The key to success: intensive supervision and continued treatment. If the offenders fail to follow through on any aspects of their therapy plan, they again lose their freedom.

“The research tells us that what really keeps these guys from sexually recidivating is being under intensive supervision,” says Reitman. “In reality the treatment model is there for us to follow.”

Margretta Dwyer, a former head of the sexual therapy program at the University of Minnesota, agrees that much cheaper alternatives exist to effectively treat sex offenders. She notes that it costs the state $134,000 annually to keep an offender civilly committed. “You could hire two guards in 12 hours shifts for $50,000 per year, per person and still save money,” she says.

But Dwyer believes the will to have a meaningful discussion about how to effectively deal with sex offenders is lacking at every level of the government. “Everyone’s afraid,” she says. “Every judge is afraid to step forward. Every representative and senator is afraid to step forward.”

Molnau has nothing to do with what Republican Peter Kinder is up to, of course. Except that as Midwest Regional Chair of the Lieutenant Governors Association, she is supposed to promote the effectiveness of Kinder and lieutenant governors in 11 other states, including her own.

“This is an exciting first step in this campaign,” Bostrom said in a statement announcing the formation of the “Bostrom for Sheriff” committee. “I am confident that my commitment to professional public service and to the core values of protecting our citizens, partnering with the community, reducing neighborhood crime, practicing fiscal responsibility, and collaborating with other law enforcement agencies are what the citizens expect from their sheriff.”

Bostrom is the son of veteran St. Paul City Council member Dan Bostrom, but is best known for heading up security efforts during last year’s Republican National Convention. Fletcher was critical of security preparations for the national gathering, repeatedly warning that the St. Paul department had failed to recruit enough police officers to ensure that it went off without serious problems.

Fletcher is a polarizing figure. The sheriff’s department drew the ire of social-justice activists last year by infiltrating the (ironically named) RNC Welcoming Committee. A series of police raids in the days leading up to the convention eventually resulted in criminal charges against eight activists who were allegedly plotting to damage property and disrupt the Republican gathering.

The four-term incumbent’s also been at the center of an investigation into the activities of the beleaguered — and now disbanded — Metro Gang Strike Force. Two damning reports released earlier this year alleged that the law enforcement agency routinely seized money from citizens without justification, failed to adequately keep track of its assets and displayed a general disregard for the civil rights of citizens, particularly minorities. The Ramsey County Sheriff’s Department was the fiscal agent for the gang strike force.

In 2006, former St. Paul Police Chief William Finney took on Fletcher in a bruising political contest, but the incumbent ultimately prevailed by just over 1,000 votes.

This week brought the revelation in the Star Tribune that sex offenders at Moose Lake were watching two dozen new 50-inch flat-screen televisions — and within hours, an announcement by Pawlenty that the $1,570 TVs would be removed from the facility’s common areas and sold off.

But it wasn’t the first time the Star Tribune shone a light on state Corrections Department spending for television equipment.

In July, the newspaper reported on a $60,000 remodeling of a conference room at the juvenile detention facility in Red Wing that included $4,300 for a single, 58-inch plasma-screen TV and had legislators “fuming.”

One was DFL Rep. Ryan Winkler, who said “the White House situation room pales in comparison” to Red Wing’s upgrades. He called the expenditure “jarring” in view of budget constraints on other areas of state government.

Questions about the conference-room spending came from both sides of the aisle, but a Republican legislator didn’t return a message from the Minnesota Independent. Staff at Red Wing referred questions to a state Corrections Departement spokesperson, who also didn’t respond to messages.

So what was the Pawlenty administration’s response to the outrage at the last plasma-TV spending scandal in the Star Tribune?

“So far as I know, nothing,” Winkler tells MnIndy. “After all, the phrase ’sex offenders’ didn’t appear in the story, so the governor’s not embarrassed enough to take action.”

Meanwhile, the governor’s quick nixing of the Moose Lake TVs has drawn criticism. Lyon County jail administrator Brad Marks says flat-screen TVs are cheaper for jails than console models, according to the Marshall Independent. The newspaper editorializes that

for Pawlenty to order the televisions removed and sold, if possible, is silly. The money has been spent, the state will now lose money on the purchase and now, it looks as if the response was more knee jerk than to spark responsible discussion about televisions and other features in our jails and prisons and about civil commitment prisons and sex offender treatment.

And Minnesota Public Radio reports that examining larger issues around such treatment is also what psychiatrist Michael Farnsworth, former Medical Director for the state Department of Human Services, is calling for in the wake of the TV hubbub.

An appeal would mean another return trip to the city, an expensive proposition that already has cramped her campaigning style in the final weeks before the Nov. 3 election. Hill was set to fly in and out of Pittsburgh today so she could be back in Minneapolis for a Ward Three candidate debate Thursday at the University of Minnesota.

Pittsburgh was the site of a September meeting of leaders from the G-20 group of nations that drew sizable street protests — protests that Hill says she was only trying to cover as a journalist for Indymedia when police arrested her, damaged her camera and confiscated a video cassette.

Hill is on the Minneapolis ballot as a “Civil Disobedience” candidate. She was also arrested outside the Rage Against the Machine concert in downtown Minneapolis during the 2008 Republican National Convention (charges were dropped), and has coordinated several “End the Fed” demonstrations at the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank.

Akeley would join a growing club that now includes Remer, Longville and Hackensack, among others. Hoyt Lakes and Aurora might combine their police forces. Wyoming is downsizing its force by switching to uninsured part-timers.

The move would leave public safety for Akeley residents in the hands of an already-stretched county, the Detroit Lakes Tribune reports:

Hubbard County Sheriff Frank Homer, contacted after the meeting, said per statute, the sheriff’s department must provide coverage if the department disbands.

But no personnel would be added in the sheriff’s office, he said, noting the department covers roughly 1,000 square miles.

“We’re stretched to the limit now,” Homer said. “With another municipality, we’d be really stretched. We’d do it. We’re obligated. But you may not see the same response time.”

Akeley’s police chief was understandably miffed:

“How long has this been in discussion?” police chief Eric Klein asked.

“We’ve talked about this,” Cliff Johnson told him. After the meeting, Johnson said the subject has been proposed on several occasions prior to this; Klein is aware the city is considering the measure, he said.

“How long are we talking?” Klein asked, ostensibly questioning when the position would be terminated. “This affects my wife and four kids. I’ve cut everything. If I could turn back the clock, I would,” he said, referring to relocating to Akeley.

[Via Don Reeder]

Photo: Ryan Bushby, Wikimedia Commons

A Gallup poll conducted at the beginning of October shows that more Americans support the legalization of marijuana than ever before — even if the majority still think it should be illegal.

Forty-four percent of Americans said they think marijuana should be legal, while 54 percent said it should stay illegal. The number who support legalization has doubled in the last 20 years, whereas in the late 1980s only 23 percent supporting legalization.

A majority of respondents living in the West said they would approve of marijuana being legal in their state (53 percent to 46 percent) while the Midwest residents showed the largest disapproval of having marijuana legal in their state with 64 percent rejecting it.

Photo: Wikipedia

Although medical marijuana use is still illegal on the federal level, the Obama administration said today that it won’t go after patients or their providers in states where it is legal.

“It will not be a priority to use federal resources to prosecute patients with serious illnesses or their caregivers who are complying with state laws on medical marijuana, but we will not tolerate drug traffickers who hide behind claims of compliance with state law to mask activities that are clearly illegal,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement to federal prosecutors this morning. “This balanced policy formalizes a sensible approach that the Department has been following since January: effectively focus our resources on serious drug traffickers while taking into account state and local laws.”

The memo, penned by David W. Ogden, Deputy Attorney General, says:

As a general matter, pursuit of these priorities should not focus federal resources in your States on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana. For example, prosecution of individuals with cancer or other serious illnesses who use marijuana as part of a recommended treatment regimen consistent with applicable state law, or those caregivers in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law who provide such individuals with marijuana, is unlikely to be an efficient use of limited federal resources.

In Minnesota, medical marijuana remains illegal. In 2009, the Minnesota Legislature passed a tightly-worded bill that would allow some medical marijuana in the state, but that measure was vetoed by Gov. Tim Pawlenty.

Advocates say they will take their battle to the people, and and constitutional amendment legislation is planned for the 2010 legislative session.

Natalie Johnson Lee (right) speaks at the Ward Five candidates' debate in Minneapolis. Photo: Paul Demko

Minneapolis City Council debates are generally polite, drowsy affairs. But Ward Five has a reputation for boisterous, even unruly, political discourse.

That might explain why more than 100 people showed up at the Capri Theater on Tuesday night to watch the five city council candidates debate the issues. Among those in the audience: state Rep. Bobby Joe Champion, Ward Four city council candidate Marcus Harcus and mayoral challenger Al Flowers.

Despite Ward Five’s reputation for fiery political rhetoric, the debate was generally civil and issues oriented. The focus was primarily on bread-and-butter concerns: crime, economic development, education and taxes.

“Change” was a theme frequently invoked by the four challengers. “We need a change in leadership,” said Kenya McKnight, a first-time candidate who is running as a Democrat. “You can’t get change if you keep re-electing the same people to the same offices.”

But incumbent Don Samuels, who is the DFL-endorsed candidate, insisted that the North Minneapolis ward has been well served by his leadership, citing a dramatic reduction in homicides in the area as evidence. “In the worst of times, with the economy being as bad as it has ever been since the Great Depression,” he said, “it is hard to believe that North Minneapolis continues to see growth and development and reduction in crime.”

Lennie Chism, who is also running as a Democrat, was easily the most aggressive in challenging Samuels. He repeatedly assailed the incumbent for his purported shortcomings. In response to a question about the achievement gap for minority students in Minneapolis’ public schools, for instance, Chism invoked the incumbent’s controversial remark in 2007 about wanting to “burn down” North High School.

“I’m of the belief that if I said I wanted to burn down Eden Prairie or Wayzata or any of those places, I would have to go,” Chism said. “Our community is being told that we should not even have a building.”

He then resorted to a naked appeal to North Side pride. “We won a couple championships with North High,” he said. “It is the pride of our community.”

Samuels acknowledged regret for the statement. “I think I’ve apologized over and over for that statement,” he said. But he went on to argue that his rhetorical gaffe is being used as an excuse to not seriously address the achievement gap.

“I am passionate about the young people in our community,” Samuels said. “If they’re not learning, we as adults are failing them. And we must stop the nonsense now!”

Police misconduct was a topic that came up often. McKnight suggested that the city’s budget woes wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t repeatedly paying out money to settle civil-rights lawsuits. “The residents of North Minneapolis feel like there’s a shakedown,” she said.

McKnight also came up with a novel answer to the question of whether police chief Tim Dolan should be retained. She called for the return of the prior chief, William McManus. Of course, McManus left his post in Minneapolis three years ago to helm the police department in San Antonio and isn’t likely looking to get his old job back.

It’s often been suggested in recent years that the Minneapolis Civil Rights Department be eliminated and that the state take over responsibility for investigating discrimination claims. But that cost-saving proposal didn’t find much support from the Ward Five candidates.

“Once you get to the Capitol you’re lost,” said Natalie Johnson Lee, another Democratic challenger. “We need to make sure that it remains right here in the city so that our neighborhoods can access it.”

Johnson Lee previously held the city council post, but lost to Samuels four years ago. She argued that the area’s residents were better served when she was at City Hall.

“After watching and seeing and observing, I had no choice but to put my hat in the ring to go back,” she said. “We need good representation for the city of Minneapolis. We need people who are compassionate for the people.”

Roberst Smithrud, who is running with support from the Republican and Independence parties, struggled to communicate his message. In response to a question about rising property taxes and declining property values, he spun himself into rhetorical collapse.

“Sorry, I’m not as prepared for this question as I thought I was,” he acknowledged. “I’m thinking that the best thing is to try and cut our expenses as best we can so that we have less need for the money.”

Even well-worn political clichés failed to rescue Smithrud. “It takes a town to raise a child,” he said in response to a question about education. “Or it takes a city to raise a child. It takes a group of people. I can’t remember the old phrase.”

The audience responded with sympathetic applause.

Chism came up with the shortest answer of the night. When asked about his plans for bringing environmentally friendly policies to City Hall, he had this to say: “There isn’t but one type of green I want to bring to North Minneapolis.”

The final question of the night dealt with Minneapolis’ new instant-runoff voting system. The candidates were asked who they would recommend as their second choice. Despite the relatively civil tenor of the debate, all but one of them declined to endorse any of their rivals. Johnson Lee was the only candidate to offer support for a fellow challenger. Her second choice: McKnight.